Please, what part of 'YES' do you not understand?
You're seeing something and I am not seeing it and I'm telling you that what I see is not what I want to look at. I want to look at what you are looking at. You say you have "...Multiple surface records, and multiple satellite records..." so please share one of the datasets here so we can plot the numbers and agree together.
OK, we agree that my addressing issues is bad and when you see something it's good. You saw "...Multiple surface records, and multiple satellite records..." so please share them. Your caring about humanity's survival means you want to spread the word. Spread it. Tell me what data you're using.Maybe you should first address the issues raised...
Then the first thing we need to agree upon is that you're mixing incompatible datasets. The first dataset you're posting is for Greenland only, while the second dataset is global (and incomplete to boot). In order to compare contemporary global temperatures to paleo temperatures, you need a global paleo dataset. Something that includes the Greenland data you're so eager to post, but that also includes everywhere else in the world too. Fortunately, we have that data. Here it is:
Sources posted. Let me know if you have any questions.
Then the first thing we need to agree upon is that you're mixing incompatible datasets. The first dataset you're posting is for Greenland only, while the second dataset is global (and incomplete to boot). In order to compare contemporary global temperatures to paleo temperatures, you need a global paleo dataset. Something that includes the Greenland data you're so eager to post, but that also includes everywhere else in the world too. Fortunately, we have that data. Here it is:
Sources posted. Let me know if you have any questions.
So even if Hadcrut only sampled twice a day (High-Low), eachThe 73 globally distributed temperature re-
cords used in our analysis are based on a variety
of paleotemperature proxies and have sampling
resolutions ranging from 20 to 500 years, with a
median resolution of 120 years (5).
Your data sets are also incompatible. The paleo stack has a resolution at which variation on the scale of a century or two would not be preserved.
There is a certain about of irony with you posting that graph, and then discussing mixing incompatible datasets.
Consider this Marcott, et al 2013 has a median resolution of 120 years,
while Hadcrut is sampled at least several times a day.
http://content.csbs.utah.edu/~mli/Economics 7004/Marcott_Global Temperature Reconstructed.pdf
You need to cite where Marcott, et al says they have a combined resolution of 20 years.Sorry, but the median resolution of component datasets tells you nothing about the resolution of the combined dataset. Marcott's combined resolution is 20 years, and the HADCRUT data I used was de-resolved to an identical 20-year resolution. So your complaint is baseless.
We're 100% together on the idea that humanity's survival is important and that we need to be aware.
If you find out something really important like this you've a responsibility as a human being to pass it on, so please share a dataset from any of those you're seeing that shows an unprecedented severe warming trend. It's easy in this wonderful info age; like, there are hundreds of sets available at just this one maintained by NOAA. We should be able to plot the numbers together and agree...
We may be talking about different things when we use the term "data set". Here's a standard definition:Then the first thing we need to agree upon is that you're mixing incompatible datasets... ...we have that data. Here it is:
...
You need to cite where Marcott, et al says they have a combined resolution of 20 years.
Here is the paper, good luck!
http://content.csbs.utah.edu/~mli/Economics 7004/Marcott_Global Temperature Reconstructed.pdf
It's right there in the dataset itself. Which you apparently ignored.
Marcott, et al 2013 is a paper,It's right there in the dataset itself. Which you apparently ignored.
We may be talking about different things when we use the term "data set". Here's a standard definition:
da·ta set
noun Computing
noun: data set; plural noun: data sets; noun: dataset; plural noun: datasets
a collection of related sets of information that is composed of separate elements but can be manipulated as a unit by a computer.
When I gave an example of a "data set" I posted ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/pa...gisp2/isotopes/gisp2_temp_accum_alley2000.txt and what followed after that was---
...
---the data "manipulated as a unit by a computer" into a .png, at the bottom of which I also included a plot of second data set (cited w/ source) that had 50 years of readings that agreed, so it served as an extension to the present.
Right. The whole globe. Not just Greenland. Which means the dataset you posted is useless in context.Remember that what we need is data that show the globe is warming at a severe and unprecedented rate.
Mithrae says there are "...Multiple surface records, and multiple satellite records..." that show this. I can't find it so I am not making any claims. If you are claiming that the globe is warming at a severe and unprecidented rate then please show data you accept and we can manipulate it together and agree.
You may have difficulty finding the data for the graphic you posted as iirc Marcott has since revised his numbers and his original PhD set was even more subdued:
...
Here is what Marcott himself said .......
The 20th century portion of our paleotemperature stack is not statistically robust, cannot be considered representative of global temperature changes, and therefore is not the basis of any of our conclusions.
https://climateaudit.org/2013/03/31/the-marcott-filibuster/
Perhaps you should take your complaints up with him ?
Marcott, et al 2013 is a paper,
You made the statement that, "Marcott's combined resolution is 20 years,"
no back it up, by citing where in the Marcott,et al 2013 paper it says that.
http://content.csbs.utah.edu/~mli/Economics 7004/Marcott_Global Temperature Reconstructed.pdf
Which is exactly why I didn't use Marcott's data in the 20th century.
Next time, read for content.
So given your history where did you source your graph ?
This is what the paper says about the resolution.It's right there in the dataset, longview. Take a look. 20 year resolution.
You seem to have lost your ability to read. Or your ability to understand what you read. Apparently you didn't even look at the graph you're complaining about. Where all sources are listed.
This is what the paper says about the resolution.
"The 73 globally distributed temperature records used in our analysis are based on a variety
of paleotemperature proxies and have sampling resolutions ranging from 20 to 500 years,
with a median resolution of 120 years (5)."
If you want to say it says otherwise, you need to cite where!
No those are websites of homepages for their respective facilities
Please link where you got this graphic ? #2
So now you don't want data, you want "facilities"?
Down the hallway and to the right. Look for the "MEN" sign.
Just pointing to a collection of NOAA data, does not point out the area you are saying the Marcott has a combined resolution of 20 years.I just did. Apparently you cannot read. Or do you imagine that the published dataset is not also part of the peer-reviewed paper, because it's in supplementary materials?
Link where you got this graph #3
Otherwise it can be assumed its another one of your own home grown efforts
Just pointing to a collection of NOAA data, does not point out the area you are saying the Marcott has a combined resolution of 20 years.
Beside if that were the case, why would the Marcott, et al, 2013 paper specifically state that their
proxies have a median resolution of 120 years?
It is. And every datapoint on it is correct, and properly sourced.
Don't blame me if the scientific data utterly destroys your position.
Still no citation I see!Because that's the median of the individual proxies. The combined dataset, using all proxies, has a resolution of 20 years. Which you would have seen right away, if you had taken the trouble to look at it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?